Is the political gridlock in Washington over killing Obamacare or not? It"s hard to say anymore.

Take House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan op-ed"s in Wednesday"s Wall Street Journal. Ryan"s article never mentioned Obamacare in his effort to press the president to negotiate. His argument"s presentation seemed to codify the recent strategic shift of the GOP from a fight it was losing on Obamacare to one over government spending, where it has better odds to get some kind of a result. This looked like a capitulation. Sen. Ted Cruz's senior aide was quick to point out the omission. Not long after, Ryan was on the radio saying that he didn't mean to suggest he'd given up on the Obamacare fight. When he referred to entitlements in his Journal op-ed, of course he meant Obamacare, too. In little more than a week, the president's health care plan has gone from the single reason for the budget showdown to an implied one.

According to Obama, it's an irresponsible effort by the GOP to blackmail the dems...essentially 'acquiesce or face default and insolvency':

"At a news conference, Obama indicated Republicans could essentially set the agenda for budget negotiations, but only if Congress agrees first to a short-term spending plan to fund the government and to raise the federal borrowing limit to avoid a possible first-ever U.S. default next week."

At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?

At 10/9/2013 10:36:29 PM, wrichcirw wrote:According to Obama, it's an irresponsible effort by the GOP to blackmail the dems...essentially 'acquiesce or face default and insolvency':

"At a news conference, Obama indicated Republicans could essentially set the agenda for budget negotiations, but only if Congress agrees first to a short-term spending plan to fund the government and to raise the federal borrowing limit to avoid a possible first-ever U.S. default next week."

At 10/9/2013 10:36:29 PM, wrichcirw wrote:According to Obama, it's an irresponsible effort by the GOP to blackmail the dems...essentially 'acquiesce or face default and insolvency':

"At a news conference, Obama indicated Republicans could essentially set the agenda for budget negotiations, but only if Congress agrees first to a short-term spending plan to fund the government and to raise the federal borrowing limit to avoid a possible first-ever U.S. default next week."

It is interesting how the Republicans never did this to George Bush, who at the time was running record 1/2 trillion deficits. Granted we are almost double that deficit in 2013, but still interesting.

Regardless, it is a huge win on Obama's side that Obamacare is now not expressly the goal of the right.

Well, the Tea Party came to existence as a result of Bush's presidency...you could say it was an allergic reaction within the GOP to some of the things that Bush pushed through.

At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?

At 10/9/2013 10:36:29 PM, wrichcirw wrote:According to Obama, it's an irresponsible effort by the GOP to blackmail the dems...essentially 'acquiesce or face default and insolvency':

"At a news conference, Obama indicated Republicans could essentially set the agenda for budget negotiations, but only if Congress agrees first to a short-term spending plan to fund the government and to raise the federal borrowing limit to avoid a possible first-ever U.S. default next week."

At 10/9/2013 10:36:29 PM, wrichcirw wrote:According to Obama, it's an irresponsible effort by the GOP to blackmail the dems...essentially 'acquiesce or face default and insolvency':

"At a news conference, Obama indicated Republicans could essentially set the agenda for budget negotiations, but only if Congress agrees first to a short-term spending plan to fund the government and to raise the federal borrowing limit to avoid a possible first-ever U.S. default next week."

It is interesting how the Republicans never did this to George Bush, who at the time was running record 1/2 trillion deficits. Granted we are almost double that deficit in 2013, but still interesting.

Regardless, it is a huge win on Obama's side that Obamacare is now not expressly the goal of the right.

Well, the Tea Party came to existence as a result of Bush's presidency...you could say it was an allergic reaction within the GOP to some of the things that Bush pushed through.

I think he was referring to Republican congressmen.

C'mon bro. The Tea Party is part of the GOP. Instead of making these unclear, undescriptive, inaccurate one-liner comments, I'm going to request that you actually make an articulate point.

At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?

At 10/9/2013 10:36:29 PM, wrichcirw wrote:According to Obama, it's an irresponsible effort by the GOP to blackmail the dems...essentially 'acquiesce or face default and insolvency':

"At a news conference, Obama indicated Republicans could essentially set the agenda for budget negotiations, but only if Congress agrees first to a short-term spending plan to fund the government and to raise the federal borrowing limit to avoid a possible first-ever U.S. default next week."

It is interesting how the Republicans never did this to George Bush, who at the time was running record 1/2 trillion deficits. Granted we are almost double that deficit in 2013, but still interesting.

Regardless, it is a huge win on Obama's side that Obamacare is now not expressly the goal of the right.

Well, the Tea Party came to existence as a result of Bush's presidency...you could say it was an allergic reaction within the GOP to some of the things that Bush pushed through.

I think he was referring to Republican congressmen.

C'mon bro. The Tea Party is part of the GOP. Instead of making these unclear, undescriptive, inaccurate one-liner comments, I'm going to request that you actually make an articulate point.

I just meant that the formation of the tea party is not tantamount to Republican congressmen refusing to raise the debt ceiling in response to a perceived debt crisis. You weren't commenting on the hypocrisy he was exposing. In fact, the greater the presence of the tea party the more hypocrisy Republicans would be guilty of in this regard.

At 10/9/2013 10:36:29 PM, wrichcirw wrote:According to Obama, it's an irresponsible effort by the GOP to blackmail the dems...essentially 'acquiesce or face default and insolvency':

"At a news conference, Obama indicated Republicans could essentially set the agenda for budget negotiations, but only if Congress agrees first to a short-term spending plan to fund the government and to raise the federal borrowing limit to avoid a possible first-ever U.S. default next week."

It is interesting how the Republicans never did this to George Bush, who at the time was running record 1/2 trillion deficits. Granted we are almost double that deficit in 2013, but still interesting.

Regardless, it is a huge win on Obama's side that Obamacare is now not expressly the goal of the right.

Well, the Tea Party came to existence as a result of Bush's presidency...you could say it was an allergic reaction within the GOP to some of the things that Bush pushed through.

I think he was referring to Republican congressmen.

C'mon bro. The Tea Party is part of the GOP. Instead of making these unclear, undescriptive, inaccurate one-liner comments, I'm going to request that you actually make an articulate point.

I just meant that the formation of the tea party is not tantamount to Republican congressmen refusing to raise the debt ceiling in response to a perceived debt crisis. You weren't commenting on the hypocrisy he was exposing. In fact, the greater the presence of the tea party the more hypocrisy Republicans would be guilty of in this regard.

Tea Party GOP members did not do it to Bush because the Tea Party didn't exist during Bush's presidency, hence no hypocrisy. So yes, I was commenting on the hypocrisy, by simply stating that there was no hypocrisy.

At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?

At 10/9/2013 10:36:29 PM, wrichcirw wrote:According to Obama, it's an irresponsible effort by the GOP to blackmail the dems...essentially 'acquiesce or face default and insolvency':

"At a news conference, Obama indicated Republicans could essentially set the agenda for budget negotiations, but only if Congress agrees first to a short-term spending plan to fund the government and to raise the federal borrowing limit to avoid a possible first-ever U.S. default next week."